10.06.

2021

K. Decker
Kurt.Decker@univie.ac.at

Paleoseismological assessment of the siting documents focused on the potential of surface

displacement by active geological faults. Such displacement may occur during strong
earthquakes (“capable faults”).

Hungarian Governmental Decree No. 118 of 2011 (VII.11.) on nuclear

safety requirements:

7.3.1.0800. “The potential occurrence of a permanent surface displacement

on the site shall be analysed and evaluated. The examination must be
sufficiently detailed to enable a substantive decision to be taken on the
question of the possibility of discarding the site by the occurrence of
permanent surface displacement.”
7.3.1.1100. “If the potential of occurrence of a permanent surface
displacement on the site cannot be reliably excluded by scientific evidences,
and the displacement may affect the nuclear facility, the site shall be
qualified as unsuitable.”

Can potential occurrences of permanent surface

displacements (capable faults) be reliably excluded?

1
 10.06.2021

Examined documents

Geological Site Report Site Safety Report Site Permit

Prepared by a large multi- Destiled from the Geological Site Report Issued by the Hungarian
disciplinary expert group by MVM Paks II Zrt. and submitted as Atomic Energy Authority
basis for the site license

All documents published on https://atlatszo.hu/ (in Hungarian language)

Surface displacement of the 2010 Darfield

Earthquake (New Zealand)

2
 10.06.2021

Surface rupture of the 2010 Darfield Earthquake (New Zealand)

https://www.newscientist.com/

2007 Niigata earthquake (Japan)

Kashiwazaki Kariwa NPP: fractures on the surface of the site

and damaged access road.

3
 10.06.2021

Tectonic map

Yellow polygon:
Paks 2 site

DHFZ : Dunaszentgyörgy-
Harta fault zone

Figure: Geological Site Report

Ács et al., 2016, Fig. 426

Corresponding figure in Site

Safety Report MVM Paks II
Zrt. 2016, Fig. 5.2.1.2.6-6
omits evidence for active
faulting
7

Comparison between the Geological Site Report (geological experts to MVM Paks II) and the Site
Safety Report (MVM Paks II to the nuclear regulator)

Site Site

Geological Site Report, Tóth et al., 2016, Fig. 57 Site Safety Report, MVM Paks II ZRT., 2016, Fig. 5.2.1.2.1-6

Data proofing active (Quaternary) deformation of the Dunaszentgyörgy-Harta fault zone summarized in
in the Geological Site Report are not thoroughly reflected in the Site Safety Report.

4
 10.06.2021

Comparison between the Geological Site Report (geological experts to MVM Paks II) and the Site
Safety Report (MVM Paks II to the nuclear regulator)

Site

Geological Site Report, Tóth et al., 2016, Fig. 57

Decker & Hintersberger, 2021. Data compiled

from the Geological Site Report

A summary of evidence for the past occurrence of strong earthquakes inferred from data compiled from
Ács et al. (2016) reveals a large number of earthquakes that occurred in the last 30.000 years. Such data is
not reflected in the Site Safety Report.
9

Extent of the DHFZ

below the Paks site

Yellow polygon:
Paks 2 site

Figure: Geological Site

Report, Ács et al., 2016,
Fig. 418; outline of Paks
2 site added

10

5
 10.06.2021

Seismic profile Pa-22 across the Dunaszentgyörgy-Harta fault zone (DHFZ)

The DHFZ shows up as ca. 1 km wide so-called “flower

structure” consisting of numerous individual faults

Figure: Geological Site Report

Tóth et al., 2016, Fig. 11

11

11

Extent of the DHFZ

below the Paks site

Yellow polygon:
Paks 2 site

Figure: Geological Site

Report, Ács et al., 2016,
Fig. 418; outline of Paks
2 site added

12

6
 10.06.2021

Comparison between the Geological Site Report (geological experts to MVM Paks II) and the Site
Safety Report (MVM Paks II to the nuclear regulator)

Geological Site Report, Ács et al., 2016, Fig. 418 Site Safety Report, MVM Paks II ZRT., 2016, Fig. 5.2.1.2.6-1

The fault zone indicated by Geological Site Report (left) extends farther North into the perimeter of the
new reactor blocks (indicated by broken yellow line).

13

13

Extent of the DHFZ

below the Paks site

Yellow polygon:
Paks 2 site

Figure: Geological Site

Report, Ács et al., 2016,
Fig. 418; outline of Paks
2 site added

14

7
 10.06.2021

Seismic profile Pa-21-S across part of the DHFZ (700 m SE of the existing NPP Paks)

The profile shows 10 individual faults (indicated by the red lines) that offset even the youngest
sediments of the Danube. These faults are shown to reach up to the surface.
Next slide

Figure: Geological Site Report,

Acs et al., 2016, Fig. 420

15

15

Paleoseismological assessment of a branch fault of the DHFZ in a 82 m long / 2.8 m deep excavation:

Trench Pa21-II ca. 700 m SE of the existing NPP

Figure: Geological Site Report,

Hálasz et al., 2016, Fig. 11 and 12

16

16

8
 10.06.2021

Paleoseismological assessment of a branch fault of the DHFZ in a 82 m long / 2.8 m deep excavation:

Trench Pa21-II ca. 700 m SE of the existing NPP

The trench exposes a series of faults that ruptured the surface in two distinct earthquakes about 19.000 to 20.000
years before present.

Figure modified from Geological Site Report,

Hálasz et al., 2016, Fig. 250

17

17

Paleoseismological assessment of a branch fault of the DHFZ in a 82 m long / 2.8 m deep excavation:

Trench Pa21-II ca. 700 m SE of the existing NPP

(A) and (B) depict surface breaking faults that disrupt and offset about 19.000 to 20.000 years old
flood sediments of the Danube.

Figure: Geological Site Report,

Hálasz et al., 2016, Fig. 27 and 35

18

18

9
 10.06.2021

Paleoseismological assessment of a branch fault of the DHFZ in a 82 m long / 2.8 m deep excavation:

Trench Pa21-II ca. 700 m SE of the existing NPP

(A) depicts a surface breaking fault that disrupts and offsets https://www.newscientist.com/
about 19.000 to 20.000 years old flood sediments of the
Danube.

Figure: Geological Site Report,

Hálasz et al., 2016, Fig. 27 and 35

19

19

Extent of the DHFZ

below the Paks site

Yellow polygon:
Paks 2 site

Figure: Geological Site

Report, Ács et al., 2016,
Fig. 418; outline of Paks
2 site added

20

10
 10.06.2021

Seismic profile Pa-22-S across part of the DHFZ (1500 m NE of the site)

The profile shows 16 individual faults (indicated by the red lines) that offset even the youngest
sediments of the Danube. Faults are shown to offset the basis of Quaternary sediments and reach
up to few metres depth below the surface.

Figure: Geological Site Report, Acs et al., 2016, Fig. 422

No further paleoseismological assessment conducted.

Figure and data are not shown in the MVM Paks II Site Safety Report that formed the basis of the
site license application.

21

21

Conclusions
Based on https://www.paks2.hu/kozerthetoen-a-letesitesi-engedelyezesrol

22

22

11
 10.06.2021

1.
Paleoseismological data derived from the trench Pa-21-II next to the site confirm the existence
of faults leading to permanent ground displacement in the site vicinity of Paks II.

MVM Paks II Zrt. 2016, Site Safety Report:

“Seismic events occurring in the research area … are not able to significantly displace the
surface, i.e., the fault planes cannot be considered capable.”

Conclusion:
The statement by MVM Paks II Zrt. is not in
line with geological evidence described in the
Geological Site Report. The contradictions
between the Site Safety Report on the one
hand, and the geological observations and
the conclusions in the Geological Site Report,
on the other hand, is, in opinion of the
authors of this study, contrary to the
principles of good scientific practice.

23

23

2.
Paleoseismological data derived from the trench Pa-21-II next to the site confirm the existence
of faults leading to permanent ground displacement in the site vicinity of Paks II.

Hungarian Governmental Decree No. 118 of 2011 (VII.11.) on nuclear safety requirements:

7.3.1.1100. “If the potential of occurrence of a permanent surface

displacement on the site cannot be reliably excluded by scientific evidences,
and the displacement may affect the nuclear facility, the site shall be
qualified as unsuitable.”

Conclusion:
Geological and geophysical data documented in the Geological
Site Report and the Site Safety Report are not sufficient to
reliably exclude the potential of a permanent surface
displacement.

The 85 m long paleoseismological trench is regarded

insufficient to provide a reliable and comprehensive
assessment of the 1 km wide active fault zone that extends in
the subsurface of the existing NPP as well as large parts of the https://www.newscientist.com/
Paks II site.
24

24

12
 10.06.2021

3.
A wealth of geological and geophysical data described in the Geological Site Report
proofs that the Dunaszentgyörgy-Harta fault zone is active.

NP-032-01, Federal Codes and Standards in the Area of Atomic Energy

Applications, Nuclear Power Plant Siting, Main Criteria and Safety
Requirements (Russia):

“It is not allowed to locate nuclear power plants:

- on the sites directly situated on active faults …”

Conclusion:
Application of Russian nuclear safety requirements
would exclude the construction of an NPP at the Paks II
site.

Background: Public information indicates that the

nuclear island and the new reactors of Paks II will be
supplied by the Russian provider Nizhny Novgorod
Engineering Company Atomenergoproekt.
25

25

Based on https://www.paks2.hu/kozerthetoen-a-letesitesi-engedelyezesrol

26

26

13